On a hot day in early June 1999, I
was participating in a conference on European security in Berlin. The
talk of the day was obviously the war in Kosovo. At the same time, at
Unter den Linden, a few blocks away from the conference venue, a messy
and joyful event was taking place – the Christopher Street Gay
Parade, a prelude to the Berlin Love Parade held a couple of weeks

In the story of post-Cold War conceptual confusion, the war in and over Kosovo stands out as a particularly interesting episode. This book provides new and stimulating perspectives on how Kosovo has shaped the new Europe. It breaks down traditional assumptions in the field of security studies by sidelining the theoretical worldview that underlies mainstream strategic thinking on recent events in Kosovo. The book offers a conceptual overview of the Kosovo debate, placing these events in the context of globalisation, European integration and the discourse of modernity and its aftermath. It then examines Kosovo's impact on the idea of war. One of the great paradoxes of the war in Kosovo was that it was not just one campaign but two: there was the ethnic cleansing campaign in Kosovo and the allied bombing campaign against targets in Kosovo and all over Serbia. Serbia's killing of Kosovo has set the parameters of the Balkanisation-integration nexus, offering 'Europe' (and the West in general) a unique opportunity to suggest itself as the strong centre that keeps the margins from running away. Next, it investigates 'Kosovo' as a product of the decay of modern institutions and discourses like sovereignty, statehood, the warring state or the United Nations system. 'Kosovo' has introduced new overtones into the European Weltanschauung and the ways in which 'Europe' asserts itself as an independent power discourse in a globalising world: increasingly diffident, looking for firm foundations in the conceptual void of the turn of the century.

Kosovo. From 24 March until 3 June, the images of aircraft taking off
from airfields in the UK and Italy, and returning home after the
completion of their missions become a regular part of TV news
programmes. They will gradually replace the images of Kosovar
refugees trying to escape the Serbian assaults. Now the former refugees
are shown mainly as a cheerful crowd, applauding NATO’s decisive
actions

Introduction: deviant voices
NATO’s bombing campaign in
Kosovo and the refusal of most Western leaders to regard it as war have
prompted numerous questions about the nature of this episode in recent
European history. How should ‘Kosovo’ be categorised? Can
it be covered by the usual linguistic repertoire, or does
‘Kosovo’ testify to the fact that ‘war’ has

The conflict in Kosovo represents a significant watershed in post-Cold War international security. Interpreting its political and operational significance should reveal important clues for understanding international security in the new millennium. This text analyses the international response to the crisis in Kosovo and its broader implications, by examining its diplomatic, military and humanitarian features. Despite the widely held perception that the conflict in Kosovo has implications for international security, unravelling them can be challenging, as it remains an event replete with paradoxes. There are many such paradoxes. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) entered into the conflict ostensibly to head off a humanitarian catastrophe, only to accelerate the catastrophe by engaging in a bombing campaign; the political aims of all the major players contradicted the military means chosen by them in the conflict. The Russian role in the diplomatic efforts demonstrated that NATO did not want Russia to be involved but in the end needed its involvement. Russia opposed the bombing campaign but ultimately did not have enough power or influence to rise above a role as NATO's messenger; the doctrinal hurdles to achieving ‘immaculate coercion’ by use of air power alone seemed to tumble in the face of apparent success; it is ultimately unclear how or why NATO succeeded.

Kosovo war is a
crucial part of two on-going shifts. First, it is increasingly time that
the actors going to war are states acting in alliance – and in
the name of humanity. Second, war is legitimised less by reference to
the safeguarding of state citizens and their well-being, and more in
terms of infringements on human rights. It is further argued that one
vital precondition for this shift is that

Introduction
Kosovo is not a security issue for
Europe only: it must be seen in the context of global political
processes. In this chapter, I argue that Kosovo was an episode in the
long-term process of the domestication and marginalisation of the United
Nations (UN) by the United States. These relations of domination are
underpinned by Manichean dichotomous myths of good

In the eyes of some observers, the
Kosovo crisis posed the greatest threat to relations between Russia and NATO
since the end of the Cold War. It also, according to some, seemingly
demonstrated the impotence and marginalisation of Russia as an actor in
European security affairs. In order to test and explore the validity of
these propositions the discussions in this chapter first chart the course of

NATO’s employment of military
power against the government of Slobodan Milosevic over Kosovo has been
among the most controversial aspects of the Alliance’s involvement in
South East Europe since the end of the Cold War. The air operations between
March and June 1999 have been variously described as war,
‘humanitarian war’, ‘virtual war’, intervention and
‘humanitarian intervention’ by the conflict

adaptation of NATO is a term that refers,
fairly obviously, to the evolution of relations between NATO and its
members, and non-member states in Europe. The most important and
controversial element of the external adaptation has been the NATO
enlargement process. Other elements include ‘outreach’
programmes such as Partnership for Peace (PfP). The discussions in the
second section here assess the impact of the Kosovo crisis on